IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Do Experimental Games Increase Take-up Rates for Index Insurance? A Randomized Control Trial Approach

  • Norton, Michael T.
  • Osgood, Daniel E.
  • Diro, Rahel
  • Gebremichael, Mengesha
Registered author(s):

    There has been much recent interest in the demand for index insurance, the influence of financial literacy on demand for financial products, as well as the positive benefits of experimental games. This paper describes a randomized control trial (RCT) that was performed to understand the effect of experimental games on take-­‐up rates for index insurance. Because estimation of the optimal level of take-­‐up is far beyond the scope of the current work, we simply present the impacts we observe on take-­‐up. We are not advocating increased take-­‐up in this paper or suggesting that take up rates are too low. These games were observed to increase take-­‐up of index insurance from 15.75% in the control group to 20.36% in the treatment group, increasing the number of purchasers by nearly one third.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/124903
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington with number 124903.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 06 Jun 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea12:124903
    Contact details of provider: Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
    Phone: (414) 918-3190
    Fax: (414) 276-3349
    Web page: http://www.aaea.orgEmail:


    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea12:124903. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.